Cited by 779Memory and Neural MechanismsNeural dynamics and brain functionNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Neural mechanisms for detecting and remembering novel events

Ranganath, Charan, Rainer, Gregor·2003·Nature Reviews Neuroscience

Abstract

The ability to detect and respond to novel events is crucial for survival in a rapidly changing environment. Four decades of neuroscientific research has begun to delineate the neural mechanisms by which the brain detects and responds to novelty. Here, we review this research and suggest how changes in neural processing at the cellular, synaptic and network levels allow us to detect, attend to and subsequently remember the occurrence of a novel event.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrn1052

Cites

142 of 142 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sensory novelty, defined as a small number of stimulus exposures, enhances neural responses throughout visual, frontal and temporal areas.

    “Sensory novelty, defined as a small number of stimulus exposures, is known to enhance neural responses throughout visual, frontal and temporal areas”

    From Information-seeking, curiosity, and attention: computational and neural mechanisms (2013) · cites this paper as Ranganath and Rainer 2003

  • Sensory novelty activates reward-responsive dopamine-recipient areas.

    “Sensory novelty, defined as a small number of stimulus exposures, is known to enhance neural responses throughout visual, frontal and temporal areas (Ranganath and Rainer 2003) and activate reward responsive dopamine-recipient areas.”

    From Information-seeking, curiosity, and attention: computational and neural mechanisms (2013) · cites this paper as Ranganath and Rainer 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ranganath, C., & Rainer, G.
Affiliations
Max Planck Society (DE)
Venue
Nature Reviews Neuroscience
Published
2003-03
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
193-202
ISSN
  • 1471-003X (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0048
OpenAlex
W1998127479
Cited by
779
References
142
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 37
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature reviews. Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
novelty detection, attention, neural mechanisms, synaptic plasticity, artificial neural networks, cellular mechanisms, memory formation
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Brain Mapping, Humans, Memory, Models, Neurological, Neuronal Plasticity, Primates, Rodentia, Synapses

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review